MPs exempted themselves from a key part of the Investigatory Powers Act making it more difficult for them to be snooped on so I'm sure they'll think of the personal repercussions.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
'Real People' Don't Need Encrypted Messaging Services, Claims U.K. Home Secretary
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
MPs exempted themselves from a key part of the Investigatory Powers Act making it more difficult for them to be snooped on so I'm sure they'll think of the personal repercussions.
What I do object to about WhatsApp is that, as far as I know, I can't choose NOT to have my messages encrypted. Yes, if I were sending someone my bank details (something I've never done on WhatsApp), I'd want to, but otherwise why should I? I'm curious about what some enthusiasts of encryption are so anxious to hide.
If I were really paranoid about my privacy, I'd be much more worried about Google tracking my every move than the infinitesimally small possibility that MI5 or GCHQ were interested in my actions. Come to think of it, the authorities could probably find out far more about 'people of interest' by hacking into Google.
If I were really paranoid about my privacy, I'd be much more worried about Google tracking my every move than the infinitesimally small possibility that MI5 or GCHQ were interested in my actions. Come to think of it, the authorities could probably find out far more about 'people of interest' by hacking into Google.
Huh? What do you mean by "commonwealth" here (assuming that's the word you were going for)? Russia and China have never been part of the Commonwealth.
I'd love her to give a proper response to this:
"But Facebook's chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, pushed back against that argument, and warned about pushing criminals into even harder to reach parts of the internet.
"If people move off those encrypted services to go to encrypted services in countries that won't share the metadata, the government actually has less information, not more," she said."
Rudd's nuts if she thinks stripping our "mainstream" service of encryption is going to stop terrorists using something else.
I'm so embarrassed this is my country making headlines for such nonsense.
"But Facebook's chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, pushed back against that argument, and warned about pushing criminals into even harder to reach parts of the internet.
"If people move off those encrypted services to go to encrypted services in countries that won't share the metadata, the government actually has less information, not more," she said."
Rudd's nuts if she thinks stripping our "mainstream" service of encryption is going to stop terrorists using something else.
I'm so embarrassed this is my country making headlines for such nonsense.
I don't think that was what @Wackery meant.
The sentence construction is a bit vague, but I think they meant: Commonwealth countries as well as countries like Russia, China etc.
At least I hope they did.
Since encryption is transparent to the user it has nothing to do with the user features and ease of use. So users can easily have both.
This is a tradeoff between security and freedoms that many counties face. After learning how Hard Obama worked to violate the freedoms of people in my country and how poorly they kept that info secure, I am currently in the privacy first and freedom camp. That could always change but right now I don't trust morons like US presidents to appoint people who are going to do the right things. I don't think the U.K. should trust them either. This is a view that cuts across political lines. Both sides of politicians want more power and it seems most citizens are united in telling them no.
This is a tradeoff between security and freedoms that many counties face. After learning how Hard Obama worked to violate the freedoms of people in my country and how poorly they kept that info secure, I am currently in the privacy first and freedom camp. That could always change but right now I don't trust morons like US presidents to appoint people who are going to do the right things. I don't think the U.K. should trust them either. This is a view that cuts across political lines. Both sides of politicians want more power and it seems most citizens are united in telling them no.
I've really been wanting to utilize a private VPN service but truthfully I don't know that much about it and don't know which companies to trust.
But now it looks like eventually they will start cracking down on these as well.
I know it's big with Corporate companies but I'm sure governments and ISPs don't want people using secure VPN networks for personal use?
But now it looks like eventually they will start cracking down on these as well.
I know it's big with Corporate companies but I'm sure governments and ISPs don't want people using secure VPN networks for personal use?
I use iMessage and FaceTime PRECISELY because they ARE encrypted.
Go pound sand dude(ette).
Go pound sand dude(ette).
hey hey, don't lump all of us together. Canada's trying to UNDO our last conservative leaders attempt to spy on the people.
Bill C-59 comes on the heals of the Conservative C-51 law, and attempts to undo and provide oversight to our spy powers. no more spy agencies with free reign to do and listen to anything and anyone they want.
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/the-roses-and-thorns-of-canadas-new-national-security-bill/
I don't think that was what @Wackery meant.
The sentence construction is a bit vague, but I think they meant: Commonwealth countries as well as countries like Russia, China etc.
At least I hope they did.
Ah, that could be it. Another poster mentioned Australia has demonstrated similar authoritarian tendencies, I'm pretty sure it would be right up Modi's street, and I wouldn't be surprised if Pakistan doesn't already block such services. No idea about the African countries, I imagine they have bigger concerns than encrypted Whatsapp messages at the moment, although they are often skipping landlines straight to mobiles and using them for services like money transfers, so it probably is a growing interest there. New Zealand and Canada though - are they still nice?
Last edited:
That is one of the most idiotic things I have seeing coming from a politician, and we have Donald Trump as president here! Well, I guess "real people" doesn't need a lock on their front/back door either since they don't have anything to hide.
Holy Cow, I'm shocked there aren't mass public protests. Oh wait, that would be terorrism.
Well of course the politicians would exempt themselves, just as they do in my country to insulate themselves from the stupider bits of our healthcare act.
Who cares. Polls said Trump wouldn't win. Polls said Brexit wouldn't win. Whoopteedoo!
Corbyn is just as much of a turd as the other leaders anyway.
Do we really vote who we want, or do we just try to vote for the lesser of the evils?
Either way we're screwed, and not just on privacy.
That would imply a voting public who actually cares about these things.
Look at people who should be protesting. Phone in one hand, frantically scrolling to find the next bit of FaceBook schadenfreude and in the other an e-cig to suck on…
Most Brits are happy to have a full stomach with plenty of extra food they can tip into the wastebin next day…
Roof over the head and Jeremy Kyle on telly to show them that they really could be even worse off.
Protest? Pffft.
*pass the crisps*
Sadly, I fear what you say is true. However, there is a slim possibility that the UK will change course. The vote for Brexit was close rather than being an overwhelming majority, and as the reality of Brexit dawns on people of the UK, including the politicians who realise young people hate them for Brexit (in addition to other things), the UK might slow the process down or abandon it altogether.
From your lips to god's ears…
Though I very much doubt that.
Theresa May has set course and we are in a barrel going over whatever the UK equivalent of Niagara is.
Former GCHQ boss backs end-to-end encryption
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/10/former_gchq_wades_into_encryption_debate/
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/07/10/former_gchq_wades_into_encryption_debate/
Ridiculous. If I iMessage a credit card number or alarm system code to my wife I would want that encrypted. Full disclosure: I'm a real person.
I watched (again) V for Vendetta the other day. Brilliant film.
According to your discussion with me on another thread yesterday you are a Chinese citizen currently working in Canada, right? You explained that you have a very different view of your government's wielding of power and control over individuals.
From what I recall of our discussion you have the view that the government wields its power for the benefit of the collective and that this in turn lifts up conditions for the individuals. So you seem to have the view that monitoring and control over individuals is of benefit to all. Whatever protects the interests of the collective also protects the interests of the individual. I hope I interpreted your posts correctly and I apologize in advance if I have it wrong.
If that is what you believe, I can see why, because as you pointed out, your government has indeed effectively modernized your economy in a very fast and efficient manner compared to the progress in other countries. And you seem to be one of the beneficiaries of your nation's rise to prosperity.
However, you fail to see any downsides as far as I can tell. I do have friends who immigrated from China and became US citizens who have a very different opinion from yours. An opinion they weren't free to express in China. Dissent is dangerous to a collective and therefore isn't allowed. If dissenters can't be made to embrace the collective view, bad things happen to them.
I have some pictures I took from materials provided to me by Falun Gong activists at their booth in Washington DC. They have photographic evidence of the brutal persecution they endured because they dared to practice a form of traditional Chinese spirituality that somehow conflicts with official government ideology. I can't post the photos here because the images and details are too graphically violent and gory for this forum. As an American who believes you have a right to your opinion, I pay you due respect for yours but I will choose my individual liberty if that is how your collective treats people who don't fall in perfect line all the time.
Actually we have mini collectives that operate like that here in the West, too, and they often come in the guise of cults. The idea of the collective is very seductive, especially if you're the one who climbs to power and influence within it.
But generally, for our governments, we have a different view in the west, having long histories of fighting for freedom from abusive and oppressive monarchies. Individuals are valued; individualism is seen as a strength. We do unite and work as a whole, too, but we do so in order to give individuals the opportunity to rise on their own strengths and hard work. Individuals are expected to contribute and give back to the community, so it is not all about service to self.
The worry for our western countries right now is that a new type of collective or cultlike thought wants to take control of us. The "cult" seems to have as its basis the raw fear of terrorism. They seem to want to scare and prod citizens into thinking only the government can save us. They seem to want us weak, scared, and willing to cede power over the most minute details of our lives to them...all in the name of fighting terror.
I think they failed to notice that a lot of our most terrifying public attacks were handled with bravery by ordinary citizens and first responders and not special government super agents. And that a lot of our most terrifying public attacks were carried out by demented people who gave plenty of advanced warning and signs on easily available social media posts. Some had already been reported to law enforcement for various mental health issues and nothing was done.
[doublepost=1501599252][/doublepost]
No, it was not Muslims back then. But when I was a little girl I remember countless news items about the IRA.
In my country it's not always Muslims. Sometimes it's crazy high school or college kids. Or someone gone bonkers over a divorce or job situation. Anybody can snap and take out a huge number of people. Are we to permit something like mind reading software to prevent crimes and let the movie premise from "Minority Report" become reality?
She's delusional and treating us like idiots. What a dunt.
Last edited by a moderator:
